Spanish company attempts to reverse domain name hijacking – Domain Name Wire

The company makes a number of claims that were “factually incorrect”.

Law and Business Enterprises Worldwide SL (pdf) has been found to have engaged in reverse domain name hijacking.

The Spanish company, which provides legal and tax services, attempted to obtain the domain name through the UDRP.

Ann Labe, a US real estate agent, registered the domain name in 1998 and previously used it to promote her services.

Although this is obvious to anyone who has done basic research, and although Labe’s identity was provided to the Complainant after the complaint was filed, Law and Business Enterprises Worldwide SL has made totally inaccurate statements (as summarized by panel) in the Amended Complaint:

“…the defendant has no right or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name, as evidenced by the fact that it has been inactive since the date of registration.

“The Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name does not reflect a desire to use it in the context of its own activities but rather to take advantage of the notoriety of the Applicant’s LABE trademark and of its labe domain name. are.

“There is ample evidence that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name primarily for the purpose of making a profit by selling, renting, or otherwise transferring it to the
Complainant, who holds prior rights, or to a competitor thereof. »

He also incorrectly stated the length of time he owned similar domains that include his LABE brand.

In other words, there was a plot wrong with the LABE file.

Attorney John Berryhill, who represented the owner of the domain, pointed out to Domain Name Wire that the snapshot of the site helped the respondent in her case. It clearly showed the prior use of the domain.

Berryhill has already disagrees with advice to prevent Wayback from indexing your site, and this is a case in point. Berryhill noted:

If you have legitimately registered and used a domain name, you want there to be objective evidence – available to everyone – to show your history of legitimate use. The suggestion to block archiving to deprive pirates of the copy of the site in case you do not renew your domain name is not a good idea.

Panelist Antony Gold concluded that the plaintiff engaged in reverse domain name hijacking for a litany of reasons.

The Complainant was represented by what appears to be its legal arm, LABE Abogados. It is the second law firm in as many months to be found guilty of reverse domain name hijacking while attempting to upgrade its domain name.

Comments are closed.